From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9161 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753194Ab0IIRxJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2010 13:53:09 -0400 Message-ID: <4C891F0D.2060103@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:53:17 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pawel Osciak CC: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, t.fujak@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v1 0/7] Videobuf2 framework References: <1284023988-23351-1-git-send-email-p.osciak@samsung.com> In-Reply-To: <1284023988-23351-1-git-send-email-p.osciak@samsung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: Sender: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Em 09-09-2010 06:19, Pawel Osciak escreveu: > Hello, > > These patches add a new driver framework for Video for Linux 2 driver > - Videobuf2. I didn't test the patches, but, from a source code review, they seem on a good shape. I did a few comments on some patches. There are a few missing features for them to be used with real drivers: 1) it lacks implementation of read() method. This means that vivi driver has a regression, as it currently supports it. 2) it lacks OVERLAY mode. We can probably mark this feature as deprecated, avoiding the need of implementing it on videobuf2, but we need a patch for Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, in order to allow the migration of the existing drivers like bttv and saa7134, where this feature is implemented, of course if people agree that this is the better way; 3) it lacks the implementation of videobuf-dvb; 4) it lacks an implementation for DMA S/G. We need to address all the above issues, in order to use it, otherwise the migration of existing drivers would cause regressions, as features will be missing. Cheers, Mauro.